By SHELTON BUMGARNER
Marmot’s Hole Guest Blogger
The Korean press is atwitter with news that the ROK’s government appears determined to impliment a “real name” regulation on Korean “netizens” sooner, rather than later. As is to be expected, the Korean press Is Not Amused.
The discussion about “real names” is full of misconceptions and illusions. The most exemplary is the misconception that there is not already a “real name system” in effect. Most of the large portal sites that lead the way in public opinion on the internet already require “real names” at time of registration. At a considerable number of news or government sites you cannot write messages on forums and bulletin boards without confirmation of your identity. Election laws require that people identify themselves on election-related sites. Even if you do not use such sites it is still hard to enjoy the freedom of anonymity like you might want to. Tracking someone down is fully possible because usually when you visit a website it records your IP. That is how most cyber crimes, such as hacking, are solved. To say you are going to require “real names” for everything in this situation is like saying you want to prohibit what little freedom of anonymity remains.
There also seems a misconception about a “real name system” being the most effective means in eradicating internet violence. If real names are required for everything, of course, it is very likely that most people will be a little more careful when they write things on the internet. But when there are events in society such as those involving the “dog poop girl” or the mass forfeiture of Korean citizenship by offspring of the country’s social and political leadership, then the response on the internet will be little different than it always has been. When people get critical about something the whole public is enraged over, how many of them are going to watch what they say because their identities are known? Ultimately any “real name system” seriously risks hurting one of the internet’s strong points, the ability to engage in criticism of power in its various forms and keep it in check. The Hankyoreh, 6 July 2005.
10 Comments
Good call. Too many paranoid cowards out there taking advantage of anonymity to spread hate.
Too many non-Koreans trying to use the Korean Internet! Must block them at all costs! Leave it to one of the world’s most insular and xenophobic peoples to simultaneously brag about having the highest level of broadband penetration while actively trying to segregate what should be a worldwide accessible public resources.
Dogbert, I agree that there is no easy, instantaneous system for foreign residents to get on-line (but that doesn’t mean they are actually prevented from using those sites, just that it involves more work to get on), and this kind of law will make it harder for many foreigners to get onto certain sites.
But this is a privacy issue affecting everyone in Korea, foreigners or not, so how do you jump to this being a conspiracy to blocks foreigners’ access “at all costs”?
(I’m guessing that there are probably a few sites that don’t even have an off-line system set up for people without working ID numbers to get on-line.)
Good call. Too many paranoid cowards out there taking advantage of anonymity to spread hate.
Isn’t free speech a basic right in the US? Since when is anonymity sacrified - there’s lots of reasons to stay anonymous (), less in countries with a healthy judicial system and legislation, but crucial in many other countries.
There was an article in the Korea Times called ‘Foreigners Excluded From Korean Sites’ which dealt with the lack of access for Korean sites by foreigners. I don’t think this has anything to do with foreigners accessing sites at all -it’s a heat-of-the-moment reaction to the ‘cyber terror’ phenomenom that the press has blown out of proportion in the last few weeks.
Btw, ‘As is to be expected, the Korean press Is Not Amused.’ Huh? What (English-language) sites have you been reading? I just blogged on this topic last night - every single paper supports the ‘Real Name System’ except the Hankyoreh. The Chosun, Times, Herald, and Joongang all support the measure. They’ve all been referring to the Yahoo Korea poll where ‘80% of netizens’ support the measure, which sounds oh-so-convincing until you read in this article that the Yahoo polled only 1,631 people, meaning the opinion of 1,300 people supporting the measure is a ‘majority’ of the 30 million or so Korean internet users out there. The Naver poll of 7,909 people found 65% support. I wonder how much support there would have been for this measure before the deluge of ‘cyber terror’ articles.
I don’t mean to dismiss the hostile actions of some netizens that have been highlighted in the past few weeks - something should be done to discourage this behavior. I’m not sure if more regulation is the answer, but considering the Korean government’s actions in the past (routinely shutting down websites or it’s far-reaching blockade against the Kim Sun-il video last summer) and the many ways Korean netizens have already given up their privacy (needing to use their resident numbers to register with many sites), I would tend to think that many people in Korea wouldn’t see a ‘Real name system’ as an outrageous measure.
I wonder if that means Kornet employee spammers (e-z biz Donbu Quick Team) will be signing their spam with their real names now . . .
Kushibo, let’s not be naive. One of the bases of the “problem” of foreigners not being readily able to transact business online in Korea (which proudly boasts of being the “most wired country in the world”) is the fact that there is no electronically verifiable “real name system” for foreigners. This will remain true even if and after the proposed real name requirement for posting Internet commentary on Korean websites is mandated. So now it goes from not being able to engage in financial business online to not even being able to have a voice online. Defend away, my man.
So now it goes from not being able to engage in financial business online to not even being able to have a voice online. Defend away, my man. I use my foreign ID number to conduct business on-line where I need to. It’s not instantaneous, which is a pain in the hind quarters, and I agree that should not be the case. I absolutely agree that should not be the case. That is indefensible.
But there is a canyon of difference between having to send a fax or .jpg of your ID to the website in question and not being able to get on at all. I use tourexpress.com to buy my plane tickets, I use KBstar to do on-line banking, and a few other things, all with my foreign resident ID number.
I don’t think it’s easy and I think that system needs to be fixed. I know from past discussions you think this problem is insolveable because no Korean wants to solve it, but I think you’re exaggerating the problem, too, especially if you think that this desire to crack down on “cyber terrorism” is really an attempt to keep foreigners off the Korean sites.
To me, this discussion is like when certain incredulous foreigners told me foreign nationals can’t own an apartment in my own name because Korea is a bunch of racists. Paraphrase of actual conversation:
SOMEONE:
Foreigners can’t own property because Korea is a racist country.
ME:
I’m a foreign citizen, but I own my own apartment.
SOMEONE:
Maybe yours is a special case.
ME:
No, any foreign citizen who legally resides in Korea can do this.
SOMEONE:
But it’s not in your name.
ME:
Yes, it is. The apartment is in my name.
SOMEONE:
Yeah, but it’s also in your wife’s name, too. Without her name on it, you couldn’t get an apartment.
ME:
Um, I’m not married.
SOMEONE:
Then it’s in a relative’s name.
ME:
No, it’s in my name and my name only. I’ll show you the deed.
SOMEONE:
You’re making this up. Koreans don’t let foreigners own property.
It has also been suggested to me that I bribed someone, someone made a clerical error, and I have been unwittingly cheated and don’t know it yet.
Okay, I know that home ownership is not the same as Internet participation, but there’s a lot of hype out there and the hype needs to be separated from the reality in order to fix this.
To what site? Did they have a customer service number to call and what did they say?